Halo 5G's Ranking System: Breakdown and Details

Intro

We all know Halo 5 will feature a true skilled ranked system which 343 has made sure to go above the expectations people were asking for. I have decide to breakdown the system for anybody that might’ve missed some info or, just wants a detailed refresher.

Basic Info

A Skill Based ranking system has been confirmed for Halo 5: Guardians! and it has been officially said to be a Skill Based ranking system never before seen in the Halo franchise. CSR (Competitive Skill Rating) will be a division based system where players are rated into seven tiers of skill level. It will be present not only in the full game, but also in the December Beta. Joshua Menke (developer of the Black Ops 2 and StarCraft II Division systems), has been and is currently working on this new system at 343 Industries (I have a feeling he might’ve pitched some ideas to 343 about some other features of the game… hint hint lol!).

Placement Matches

  1. Players play a few matches to get placed into a Division

  2. These matches will roughly determine what skill level you belong in by seeing how you perform

Example: If you lose against a few Gold-level players, but you are winning against Bronze level players, you will be placed in the Silver division. You then work up from there.

  1. You have to play 10 matches before the system shows you your skilled rank

  2. There will be separate ranks for each Ranked playlist

Divisions and Tiers

  1. The game will include 7 divisions

  2. Iron ➺ Bronze ➺ Silver ➺ Gold ➺ Diamond ➺ Semi-Pro ➺ Pro

  3. The first five divisions will each have three tiers

Example: Bronze 1, Bronze 2, Bronze 3, Silver 1, Silver 2, Silver 3 (and so on and so on)

  1. The final two divisions will be very unique, specifically designed for the best players in the game

  2. Win means you rank goes up, loss means your rank goes down (Amount depends on opponent skill)

Example: Let’s pretend I’ve been placed in the Silver division. If I play and lose against a team of Gold players, I will lose rank less than I would have if I had lost to someone from a lower Division, such as Bronze. The same goes for winning – if I beat a team of Bronze players, I won’t rank up as much compared to when I beat a team of Pro Players.

Semi-Pro and Pro Divisions
Josh Menke has explicitly stated that while the 1-50 rating is effective, it does not accurately display the skill gap between players. In previous Halo’s, many players have achieved 50’s but the skill gap between those Rank 50 players is still very large. Halo 5’s Pro Divisions aim to fix that.

  1. For Semi-Pro, you will now have a numerical Rating that directly displays how you compare to other players

  2. Ratings will begin around 1500 and will use an ELO-style system (this is actually how Halo 2 ranks people using 1-50’s)

  3. once you reach Semi-Pro status, you will remain in the upper divisions for the rest of the Season (League Play systems often feature Seasons with a rank reset at the start of each Season)

  4. The Top 200 players with the highest ratings will comprise the Pro division

  5. There will be in-game leaderboards that let you view the Top 200 Ranked players in the world – the Pro players

Extras

  1. Halo 5 will also include a progress based ranked system like Halo Reach and Halo 4’s SR(Spartan Ranks)

  2. I think the community should stop complaining about sprint (It fits in my opinion)

  3. I also think we should give Smart Scope a chance (its only for looks and its not ADS)

  4. The last thing is that 343 should bring back original shield sounds and the original announcer voice

  5. Actually the last thing is I want Kill Cams removed

  6. Actually the last-last thing is that I hoped you guys enjoyed the post, the Beta will be out soon and we are all excited!

Pretty much arena from Reach again.

> 2533274823890156;2:
> Pretty much arena from Reach again.

No, its not like Halo Reach again. The “Ratings” only come when you reach Semi-Pro because Pro is only limited to 200 players (The Best Only). I think this is well organized and thought out. The first five divisions are normal ranks. Semi-Pro has rating and resets each season.

My guess is Diamond will actually be called Onyx to follow typical Halo theme from the past.

LMFAO Sounds exactly like Call of Duty Black Ops 2’s league system

Nice job 343 what is this the 1,000th thing you are taking from COD and putting in halo? You just can’t listen to fan and make some new nice 1-50 style ranking system we all ask for

> 2533274798774028;4:
> My guess is Diamond will actually be called Onyx to follow typical Halo theme from the past.

No it will be changed to platinum to follow Call of Duty’stheme. This whole ranking system follows call of duty’s leageu system

> 2535464067998264;5:
> LMFAO Sounds exactly like Call of Duty Black Ops 2’s league system
>
> Nice job 343 what is this the 1,000th thing you are taking from COD and putting in halo? You just can’t listen to fan and make some new nice 1-50 style ranking system we all ask for

Your argument against this ranking system is that it bears a striking resemblance to another ranking system the guy who designed it made, solely because that other game is a Call of Duty title (one of the most well-received, I might add).

What really matters is whether or not it will work well in the matchmaking system (a credible concern, given the MCC’s issues with such matters), and accurately determine individuals’ skill levels. That said, I’m eager to see how this system works first-hand in the beta.

I honestly don’t care how

but please 343i, place players against others of equal skill

and monitor/prevent rank cheats

I am not that good of a halo player.

the CSR ranks will just make me feel even more retarted then I already do. :confused:

> 2533274974984138;9:
> I am not that good of a halo player.
>
> the CSR ranks will just make me feel even more retarted then I already do. :confused:

Maybe at first… but if it works well, you will be matched with players of similar caliber and have the chance to learn/improve at your own pace.

Having a working, in-depth ranking system for matchmaking is certainly more enjoyable than being matched with players that can mop the floor with you OR players that still don’t have a good understanding of the game, right?

> 2535464067998264;5:
> LMFAO Sounds exactly like Call of Duty Black Ops 2’s league system
>
> Nice job 343 what is this the 1,000th thing you are taking from COD and putting in halo? You just can’t listen to fan and make some new nice 1-50 style ranking system we all ask for

Why does it matter? When it comes to a ranking system, the only thing that should matter is how well it does its job, i.e. how well it matches players based on skill and displays the skill differences. Anything else is completely irrelevant.

> 2533274825830455;11:
> > 2535464067998264;5:
> > LMFAO Sounds exactly like Call of Duty Black Ops 2’s league system
>
>
> Why does it matter? When it comes to a ranking system, the only thing that should matter is how well it does its job, i.e. how well it matches players based on skill and displays the skill differences. Anything else is completely irrelevant.

Precisely.

> 2535464067998264;5:
> LMFAO Sounds exactly like Call of Duty Black Ops 2’s league system
>
> Nice job 343 what is this the 1,000th thing you are taking from COD and putting in halo? You just can’t listen to fan and make some new nice 1-50 style ranking system we all ask for

It’s the same designer, Joshua Menke, This guy designed the StarCraft II system and Black Ops II system. StarCraft II’s system is widely considered one of the best ranking systems in gaming. His name alone is instant credibility.

Whether you liked Black Ops II or not, The System they added there was also very well put together.

With his track record, I have high hopes for his vision of Ranking for Halo 5.

So laugh all you want mister, But the man behind this ranking system knows his stuff. Not only that, But I would rather not have a 1-50. League system are far better to work with for competitive play.

Snort. It’s not ripping off CoD or Star Craft II, even though this guy designed both systems. What this ranking system really is: ELO from chess with it’s tournament brackets thrown in as well. If everyone is starting at 1500 ELO… then he’s got it wrong. 1500 ELO indicates a lower end intermediate player. If semi-pro/Pros are starting at 1500 ELO in their division, then that is also wrong. Semi pro/Pro ELO ratings are between 2100-2700. Also, calculating one’s division after 10 games? Yup, that’s another online ELO thing. Sigh.

Why is it gaming still insists on using ELO in some form or another for competitive ranking? Even after ELO has repeatedly been proven to be a bad choice for online gaming ratings/rankings? Even after it’s been demonstrated calculating ELO after each game leads to inflated ratings that don’t accurately measure player’s abilities?

So if I am the best player in the game, but my team loses, my rank would still decrease?

> 2533274839716684;14:
> Snort. It’s not ripping off CoD or Star Craft II, even though this guy designed both systems. What this ranking system really is: ELO from chess with it’s tournament brackets thrown in as well. If everyone is starting at 1500 ELO… then he’s got it wrong. 1500 ELO indicates a lower end intermediate player. If semi-pro/Pros are starting at 1500 ELO in their division, then that is also wrong. Semi pro/Pro ELO ratings are between 2100-2700. Also, calculating one’s division after 10 games? Yup, that’s another online ELO thing. Sigh.

There is no specific starting point for the system. The important part of Elo are the differences between players’ ratings. The absolute rating is not as significant as the difference between ratings of two players. Where you have players start would probably affect the median rating, but other than that, it makes no difference.

> 2533274839716684;14:
> Why is it gaming still insists on using ELO in some form or another for competitive ranking? Even after ELO has repeatedly been proven to be a bad choice for online gaming ratings/rankings? Even after it’s been demonstrated calculating ELO after each game leads to inflated ratings that don’t accurately measure player’s abilities?

I suppose you have a suggestions for something better?

> 2533274825830455;16:
> > 2533274839716684;14:
> > Snort. It’s not ripping off CoD or Star Craft II, even though this guy designed both systems. What this ranking system really is: ELO from chess with it’s tournament brackets thrown in as well. If everyone is starting at 1500 ELO… then he’s got it wrong. 1500 ELO indicates a lower end intermediate player. If semi-pro/Pros are starting at 1500 ELO in their division, then that is also wrong. Semi pro/Pro ELO ratings are between 2100-2700. Also, calculating one’s division after 10 games? Yup, that’s another online ELO thing. Sigh.
>
>
>
> There is no specific starting point for the system. The important part of Elo are the differences between players’ ratings. The absolute rating is not as significant as the difference between ratings of two players. Where you have players start would probably affect the median rating, but other than that, it makes no difference.
>
>
>
> > 2533274839716684;14:
> > Why is it gaming still insists on using ELO in some form or another for competitive ranking? Even after ELO has repeatedly been proven to be a bad choice for online gaming ratings/rankings? Even after it’s been demonstrated calculating ELO after each game leads to inflated ratings that don’t accurately measure player’s abilities?
>
>
> I suppose you have a suggestions for something better?

If one is dead set on using ELO then it has to be done how it’s done it chess; I.E. calculating ratings after a spread of games (7-10). It’s not a system meant to be calculated after each game, it’s sustained ability over time. If one is using brackets, then the starting point for players absolutely matters. Brackets in tournaments are designed to keep players playing in their respective ratings group and only allows for players to change brackets when they’ve demonstrated the skill necessary to advance to the next one. E.g. a 1500 should not be playing 1900-2000 rated players. Conversely, a 2100 should not be playing 1600s. What makes Elo special in chess is that it’s insanely accurate because it’s used properly.

Moreover, where players start in the ratings is extremely important. Elo is a linear rating system. 0-3000. If you have master level players starting at 1500/rated at 1500, then the ratings are compressed. The reverse of this also has problems if you have 1000-1200 Elos starting at, say, 2000, then you get inflated ratings across the board. One then ends up with rank islands like we saw in Halo 2. This is why Elo is spread across 0-3000. Median is 1500-1700 (intermediate players).

Brackets, in some cases, are not absolutes. I am a good example of this. My Elo rating is 2450, I am able to play in two different brackets. I could play in a bracket that has a starting point of 2200 with players at the top end being very strong FM’s (working on their IM title norms) and IMs. The other bracket would top out with very strong IMs (earning GM norms) or GMs. Of course this is dependent on the size of the tournament too.

> 2535464067998264;5:
> LMFAO Sounds exactly like Call of Duty Black Ops 2’s league system
>
> Nice job 343 what is this the 1,000th thing you are taking from COD and putting in halo? You just can’t listen to fan and make some new nice 1-50 style ranking system we all ask for

Or it could be that CoD copied the league system from…I don’t know…MOBA games like LoL, and the ranking system you see within Starcraft II and most modern MLG and League based games in general?

> 2533274839716684;17:
> Moreover, where players start in the ratings is extremely important. Elo is a linear rating system. 0-3000. If you have master level players starting at 1500/rated at 1500, then the ratings are compressed. The reverse of this also has problems if you have 1000-1200 Elos starting at, say, 2000, then you get inflated ratings across the board. One then ends up with rank islands like we saw in Halo 2. This is why Elo is spread across 0-3000. Median is 1500-1700 (intermediate players).

But it’s not really 0-3000. That is, it doesn’t have to be. Expected scores are calculated based on rating differentials, K-factors can be defined for arbitrary intervals. It doesn’t really make a difference whether you measure from 0 to 3000, or from -12000 to -5000. The mathematics are the same. Of course you can’t set up your ratings any way you want, but as long as the ratings are done correctly, it doesn’t make a difference for the functionality of your ratings.

> 2533274839716684;17:
> Brackets, in some cases, are not absolutes. I am a good example of this. My Elo rating is 2450, I am able to play in two different brackets. I could play in a bracket that has a starting point of 2200 with players at the top end being very strong FM’s (working on their IM title norms) and IMs. The other bracket would top out with very strong IMs (earning GM norms) or GMs. Of course this is dependent on the size of the tournament too.

You’re a professional chess player?

It’s exactly like Halo Reach.